As I like to say about political news, sometimes "you can't make this stuff up." And on Tuesday night, there was another installment of that, as a federal prison inmate won over 40% of the Democratic Primary vote against President Obama in West Virginia.

Really. That's what really happened.

As of midnight, the prisoner had won 10 of the 55 counties in West Virginia.

"West Virginia Democrats are completely different from anywhere else in the country," tweeted Tom Jensen of Public Policy Polling as the returns came in last night.

"Obama's approval with West Virginia Democrats on our last poll there was 45%," said Jensen, who added "what's happening there is not that shocking."

That was evident when Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV)- former Governor and now Senator running for re-election - wouldn't even tell reporters if he voted for President Obama in the primary.

So did he vote for the inmate? Okay, I'm just kidding.

Whether you think this is a legitimate news story isn't the point - it is what we call "man bites dog" when a federal prison inmate doing time for making threats on college campuses can take 41% of the vote in a statewide primary.

Especially when his opponent is the President of the United States.

Who is Inmate 11593-051? Keith Judd is his name - he actually ran for President before in 2008 from his prison cell, and garnered 1.7% in the Democratic Primary in Idaho.

This time, Judd forked over the $2500 filing fee to get on the ballot in West Virginia, and actually made himself eligible for delegates at the Democratic Party convention in September.

But don't bet on him getting any.

Of course, the fact that an inmate could win counties in West Virginia named for Daniel Boone, Henry Clay and Daniel Webster made critics of the President roll with laughter on the internet last night.

"I know some folks from Boone County. I can't say I find this shocking," said one on Twitter.

But if you look back at 2008, Mr. Obama actually carried Boone County on election night against John McCain.

Does it matter that Mr. Obama couldn't break 60% in West Virginia? Probably not. He certainly isn't favored to win that state in November.

But should you ignore the fact that someone in jail could get over 40% of the vote against the President?

Your ignorance about Southerners isn't really different from North Carolina's supposed ignorance about gay marriage.

North Carolina actually has quite an influx of young professionals and teachers heading that way. People who would likely be considered in the middle or to the left. Just look at the 2008 Presidential election. Went from 56/44 Republican to 50/49 Democrat. I expect the gap to be even wider this year.

The proposed measure likely failed solely because of the motivated religious vote who are well within their right to disagree with gay marriage based on their religious beliefs.

I can't imagine a lot of people give a shit one way or another about gay marriage. But the thousands and thousands of religious people in the South form the most motivated group to go and vote against it. Far more motivated than people who firmly believe in gay marriage or would say "Ah, what the hell" and vote for it.

A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe

Your ignorance about Southerners isn't really different from North Carolina's supposed ignorance about gay marriage.

North Carolina actually has quite an influx of young professionals and teachers heading that way. People who would likely be considered in the middle or to the left. Just look at the 2008 Presidential election. Went from 56/44 Republican to 50/49 Democrat. I expect the gap to be even wider this year.

The proposed measure likely failed solely because of the motivated religious vote who are well within their right to disagree with gay marriage based on their religious beliefs.

I can't imagine a lot of people give a shit one way or another about gay marriage. But the thousands and thousands of religious people in the South form the most motivated group to go and vote against it. Far more motivated than people who firmly believe in gay marriage or would say "Ah, what the hell" and vote for it.

Please.

There shouldn't even be a goddamn vote on the issue. If straight people can get married, so can gays. Rights apply to everyone or no one.

YOUR religion should not be able to affect my life. They're imposing their dumb superstition on the lives of other people.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I thought Republicans were all anti-big government and shit? What's more big government than telling others who they can and can't marry?

This always irks me as well. Can't fly the big government flag if you want to use the government to stop the things you dont like. I really just think this issue is beyond stupid, there are so many better places to stake the GOP flag. Its going to happen, the tides are changed for educated people, why be on the wrong side of the issue?

My whole bag is this. If it doesn't affect my life, and they aren't hurting or stealing from anyone, I don't give a shit what you do. It's not my business. No gay people ever told me I couldn't marry my wife because of some ancient book. Why would I do it to them?

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:My whole bag is this. If it doesn't affect my life, and they aren't hurting or stealing from anyone, I don't give a shit what you do. It's not my business. No gay people ever told me I couldn't marry my wife because of some ancient book. Why would I do it to them?

I'm pretty much in agreement with you. But answer me this, why do they have to insist on the concept/construct of marriage, when they have the opportunity to civilly union? IOW, same difference.

...another poster has brought this up in the past and I felt it was always a valid point.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:My whole bag is this. If it doesn't affect my life, and they aren't hurting or stealing from anyone, I don't give a shit what you do. It's not my business. No gay people ever told me I couldn't marry my wife because of some ancient book. Why would I do it to them?

I'm pretty much in agreement with you. But answer me this, why do they have to insist on the concept/construct of marriage, when they have the opportunity to civilly union? IOW, same difference.

...another poster has brought this up in the past and I felt it was always a valid point.

Why the semantics? Just call it "marriage" and be done with it. We won't have to hear about it anymore.

skatingtripods wrote:There's a vote on the issue because marriage is legally defined, usually in the state constitution, as between a man and a woman.

One of the reasons that marriage is legally defined is because the government treats married couples differently than it treats singles (e.g. taxation). Everybody should be treated the same, single or married, and everybody should have the opportunity to stay single or get married according to their own beliefs and preferences.

In other words—and, no surprise, this comes from a moderate conservative—the government should not legislate morality. That goes for marriage, sexual preference, stem-cell research, abortion and all the other crap that should be defined by an individual's contract with his or her god and not by government.

skatingtripods wrote:There's a vote on the issue because marriage is legally defined, usually in the state constitution, as between a man and a woman.

One of the reasons that marriage is legally defined is because the government treats married couples differently than it treats singles (e.g. taxation). Everybody should be treated the same, single or married, and everybody should have the opportunity to stay single or get married according to their own beliefs and preferences.

In other words—and, no surprise, this comes from a moderate conservative—the government should not legislate morality. That goes for marriage, sexual preference, stem-cell research, abortion and all the other crap that should be defined by an individual's contract with his or her god and not by government.

I loved Obama giving that exclusive to Robin Roberts even though his entire administration has been testing the waters on this issue for weeks now, and his position has always been an evolution even though he is 100% fine with gay marriage. Fucking HACK POL. This one is an outlier even for politics, in its calculation.

Fuck that asshole, even though I love his look the other way covert foreign policy. <-Fair and Balanced!

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

Problem all over the world today is that political strategy in almost all mainstream parties is based on making the most short-term populist promises in order to get elected. Forget delivering on them...just make the promises and get in the door....

Populist agenda's/promises have always been there (particularly state and local) but the degree it is present now in key national elections is horrendous.

Too much of the population wants the government to provide too much and for someonne else to pay for it.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:My whole bag is this. If it doesn't affect my life, and they aren't hurting or stealing from anyone, I don't give a shit what you do. It's not my business. No gay people ever told me I couldn't marry my wife because of some ancient book. Why would I do it to them?

I'm pretty much in agreement with you. But answer me this, why do they have to insist on the concept/construct of marriage, when they have the opportunity to civilly union? IOW, same difference.

...another poster has brought this up in the past and I felt it was always a valid point.

Incorrect. The hillbillies in the Colorado house just used childish tricks to run out the clock on the legislative session so the civil union bill wouldn't even come up to vote.

Letting the religious right run this country is far worse than anything Obama can come up with. Any politician who disagrees or blocks this legislation is either a moron or pandering.

Don't be naive or stupid enough to believe that's the arena of one party or another. There's nothing going on here that's different than the last 250 years when political foes hated and killed each other. Then they did it in the Square. Times call for more discretion.

C'mon. People act like what they're living through is the most dramatic and ifluential period of time in history where their own views take on added importance and everything wrong in the country is more pronounced.

Shake your fucking selves. This is what it is. This is what it was. It's ugly and it's always been a hatefest. This country was founded on such blatant hatred for others that people risked life and limb to get here and did it again when they got here.

Christ- You guys aren't dumb enough to have ever believed life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness wasn't preceded by "First we'll get ours and make sure of it".

Live life. Shut the fuck up. It ain't getting better. It was never 'better'. It was just different and you weren't around.

The current media system and ease of access for dipshits to vote has made the religious hold on the right stronger than ever. It's pushed our rights further and further back on their agenda and created. We had a presidential election swing in 2004 because of fucking Gay Marriage (watch the PBS Frontline of the Republicans tactics during that campaign, it was amazing how they were able to narrow down religitards and send people to their doors to get them riled up and push them to vote for W).

There is a growing divergance in this country and if you want to pretend it doesn't exist you should spend your time hanging out with the ostrich's.

And I really have no idea what getting "ours" has to do with an entire wing of the two party system using new media to create a cult like hold over the religious morons that will keep them in office. It is possible to support both liberty and "getting ours."

The more media evolves and the more access morons have to both being played by politicians for votes and actually voting the worse the situation gets.

And yes, if the neo-Christians get hold of the supreme court, gay marriage and abortion will be gone within weeks, peaceful public rallying will never have a chance at existing and I'll be moving across the Atlantic.

e0y2e3 wrote:And yes, if the neo-Christians get hold of the supreme court, gay marriage and abortion will be gone within weeks, peaceful public rallying will never have a chance at existing and I'll be moving across the Atlantic.

Why Obama didn't show real leadership as all the lefties parrots like to pretend he did and gets zero credit for doing what he did yesterday. Not only that, it certainly appears he only bothered because he was forced in to saying something instead of continue to "evolve" for political expediency.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I thought Republicans were all anti-big government and shit? What's more big government than telling others who they can and can't marry?

This always irks me as well. Can't fly the big government flag if you want to use the government to stop the things you dont like. I really just think this issue is beyond stupid, there are so many better places to stake the GOP flag. Its going to happen, the tides are changed for educated people, why be on the wrong side of the issue?

LOL. Think for a second, you 2. Republicans are anti big government when that government tries telling conservatives what to do.

How many gays and lesbians are registered Republicans? Thought so. The Right doesn't give 2 shits about big government telling the Left what to do.

I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever. - CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team

The current media system and ease of access for dipshits to vote has made the religious hold on the right stronger than ever. It's pushed our rights further and further back on their agenda and created. We had a presidential election swing in 2004 because of fucking Gay Marriage (watch the PBS Frontline of the Republicans tactics during that campaign, it was amazing how they were able to narrow down religitards and send people to their doors to get them riled up and push them to vote for W).

There is a growing divergance in this country and if you want to pretend it doesn't exist you should spend your time hanging out with the ostrich's.

And I really have no idea what getting "ours" has to do with an entire wing of the two party system using new media to create a cult like hold over the religious morons that will keep them in office. It is possible to support both liberty and "getting ours."

The more media evolves and the more access morons have to both being played by politicians for votes and actually voting the worse the situation gets.

Different. Not worse. You tell me your life is more difficult or you have fewer freedoms than people had in decades ago I'm calling you either a liar, a fool or a troll.

Your life is better and easier and freer than your parents life was.

The Viet Nam era was the worst, WWII was the worst, the Great Depression was the worst, today is the worst.

Fuck that. You tell me specifically what liberties and what freedoms you've lost. You tell me how your options are limited more so than your parents or grandparents.

Economically times are tough. Cyclical for the most part, sucks to be us. But please, stop with the ostrich shit and the generalities and the cliches and all of lifes lessons you learn from PBS documentaries.

Is there concerning shit? Yeah... and those prone to panic and hyperbole will put it up there as their banner. Very Joe McCarthy-like.

Some people aren't happy or fulfilled unless they're miserable and empty. I've gotten used to that.

All in all people are better off today, wealthier today, more connected today and freer today than they were in the past.

If something like Haight Street during Vietnam were attempted today the Gov't would have it shut down within a week. Fake ass OWS wasn't even close to Haight and ultimately got raided by the police state.

So yes, our lives are measurably more limited than our parents, especially when comparing the Vietnam situation re: the Hippies.

And come on you aren't an idiot. The "New Media" argument is a bunch of fuckstick mouth breathers becoming connected to the world, it has nothiing to do with you are I. People that in the past would have been pushing the button in the factory for eight hours, going home drunk and beating there wife and then going to bed now manage to work in some Fox News so they can scream about the Gays ruining the country.

And it wasn't a life lesson from a PBS documentary Peeks, stop being an ostrich, it was the leaders of the Republican campaign literally explaining how they got Bush elected. The new media, their ability to collect data on us to identify targets, etc.... they break it all down.

When the people that are pushing the buttons of the masses to make them jump admit to how they are doing it people should pay attention.

And again, all of these fucks suck, just keep religion out of the Supreme court and I'm fine. The minute this new age manipulation of religitards takes of the SC everything achieved since the 60s is dead.